Re: LDP rid

WARNING: more my rambles than an actually answer...

i would say it doesnt matter in a link local (multicast hello) configuration
the neighbors will come up and peer and pass label information which is the
whole point...

in a targeted session neighbor configuration (unicast hello) i guess this
would not be the case as you would have to route to the LDP Id, but then
again that doesnt mean you have to have an exact /32 host route to get there
either

the usual way i set this up is with a routing protocol running advertising a
loopback interface which is usually a /32 also used for the BGP sessions so
it just sort of falls into place...

probably something i am missing and it is probably letting you know that
information for some reason, but i cannot think of anything that is breaking
the LDP neighbor-ship and passing of labels...

i would love to hear more from more knowledgeable experts thought...

and if you dont have any problems and your setup is "working" then not sure
how you would even know until the problem did arise...

--
Garry L. Baker
"There is no 'patch' for stupidity." - www.sqlsecurity.com
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Bernard Steven <buny.steven_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> Is it a must that peer  LDP router IDs have an exact route in the local
> routing table ?
> Even without an exact match , things work fine.
>
> LDP Id: 6.6.6.6:0; no host route to transport addr
>
> regards
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net